Controversial wikis

Topic: Black Lives Matter

Instead of getting into retarded edit wars over ideological differences, I'm bringing this to the forum so that these kinds of things can be decided upon in a quorum instead of being acted on unilaterally.

The bottom line though, is we are not Wikipedia. Nothing in any of the versions of the wiki edits I've seen have anything to do with tagging, which is what the wikis are actually for. If it needs to have some kind of entry, it should just read with something simple and non-controversial like "Black Lives Matter is an international activist group", or something similar to that effect, the end, period, full-stop. If there are any elements of tagging or correlations with other wikis, those should also be added. An external link to Wikipedia can be used to direct users that want to learn more about the topic there.

Black Lives Matter is an international activist group.

See also

• real life

External links

• Wikipedia: Black Lives Matter

The above is my take on it, keeping it simple and to the point. Thoughts?

+1

+1.

+1

While we're at it, should a list of tags on political/controversial topics be made? Or alternatively make a "real life-related" tag list?

Personally I think the description is too light, and that wikis of groups or organizations should at least include one sentence describing what their group or organization stands for or does. While you might want to toss all that information to wikipedia, I find that being able to at a glance get a quick idea of what the group or organization does to be valuable for wikis. If I want to know more, then I might go to wikipedia.

Here, take a look at the first sentences of groups and organizations from wikipedia:

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an organized movement advocating for non-violent civil disobedience in protest against incidents of police brutality against African-American people.

National Socialism (German: Nationalsozialismus), more commonly known as Nazism (/ˈnɑːtsiɪzəm, ˈnæt-/),[1] is the ideology and practices associated with the Nazi Party—officially the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei or NSDAP)—in Nazi Germany, and of other far-right groups with similar ideas and aims.

Christianity is an Abrahamic monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement is an international humanitarian movement with approximately 97 million volunteers, members and staff worldwide[2] which was founded to protect human life and health, to ensure respect for all human beings, and to prevent and alleviate human suffering.

All of them right at the start try and give a brief description of the group or organization so that you have a very quick understanding of what they do or what they stand for. That's frankly how I think our wikis should be.

If we applied this type of description to some of other wikis this is how they would read:

Current Sony Wiki:

Consumer electronics giant from Japan. The company's branch that produces video game software and hardware is Sony Computer Entertainment.

Proposed Sony Wiki:

Sony is a Japanese company.

External Links

• Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony

Current Nintendo Wiki:
A well-known video game company that started out as a hanafuda manufacturer.

Proposed Nintendo Wiki:
Nintendo is a Japanese company.

External links

• Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo

Current Adolf Hitler Wiki:
The dictator of Germany from 1934 to 1945, as well the leader of the infamous Nazi Party, and writer of Mein Kampf. Commonly known as the Führer, and was generally despised all over the world. Also responsible for starting the World War II. It's a common practice to feature him in almost any media, usually as a main villain, often with very impossible acts of evil or plans of world domination.

Proposed Adolf Hitler wiki:
Adolf Hitler is a German politician.

External links

• Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler

Current Doug Bowser wiki:
President and COO of Nintendo of America, succeeding Reggie Fils-Aime in both roles following Fils-Aime's retirement in 2019.

Yes, that's his actual name.

Proposed Doug Bowser wiki:

Doug Bowser is an American businessman.

External links

• Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doug_Bowser

Having a basic understanding of what they do or what they stand for provides context for their depiction and context for what you're seeing in the tagged images. Losing that context makes the wiki pretty useless.

-1

Rather than put up a pretense that the description is suddenly inadequate because it's inconvenient for you, perhaps we should realize that usage of the wiki has evolved.

No one seems to mind additional description in other wikis, including you, so I don't see why it should suddenly apply here.

DreamFromTheLayer said:

No one seems to mind additional description in other wikis, including you, so I don't see why it should suddenly apply here.

I'd advocate against that. Wikis should only help for danbooru-related things, such as tagging and usage. Maybe small additions and trivia in cases like meme_outfit or pixiv/twitter culture, but other than that they should be short.

I've seen way too many character wikis containing three paragraphs on what the characters do in their series/their personality and no information on outfit or tagging whatsoever, and i'd rather not have more like those.

NWF_Renim said:

None of those wikis regard currently happening political events though. The point of this is to prevent inevitable shitstorms from happening by being completely neutral. Just look at the string of comments under the recent BLM uploads.

DreamFromTheLayer said:

No one seems to mind additional description in other wikis, including you, so I don't see why it should suddenly apply here.

Girls und Panzer is not controversial and its characters are not stopping police officers from responding to emergencies in Seattle.

nonamethanks said:

None of those wikis regard currently happening political events though. The point of this is to prevent inevitable shitstorms from happening by being completely neutral. Just look at the string of comments under the recent BLM uploads.

Girls und Panzer is not controversial and its characters are not stopping police officers from responding to emergencies in Seattle.

The fact the tag exists at all will always make any wiki or lack of wiki controversial. The simple fact is, is that your proposed wiki is both useless in preventing a shitstorm and useless on providing information. The mere fact that you're calling them a "activist" group will trigger and enrage some users who think they're something more like a "terrorist" group. The rest of the information in your wiki provides no actual info outside of the name and wiki link, which given that you can't even describe the group without being "controversial" would push the proposal that the only thing that should exist in the wiki then being the external link to wikipedia and nothing more.

Of course even with nothing more than a wiki link, you'll still have people causing a shitstorm because you're even recognizing the group, so again in the end you're accomplishing a lot of nothing.

NWF_Renim said:
The mere fact that you're calling them a "activist" group will trigger and enrage some users who think they're something more like a "terrorist" group.

That is true, but there has to be a minimum of description we have to accept. We could try to parrot Wikipedia's description, something like:

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an organized movement centered around the rights of african-american people.

Black Lives Matter is an international anti-racism activist movement, primarily known for the Ferguson protests in 2014 and the George Floyd protests in 2020. Use this tag for images referencing the movement's title or events surrounding it.

I think something like this provides enough information to be useful without editorializing.

I don't see what the big fuss is about. We can just take a neutral stance and call it a day.

The mere fact that you're calling them a "activist" group will trigger and enrage some users who think they're something more like a "terrorist" group.

Danbooru shouldn't be a place to discuss such things. We should invite those users to find a better place where to discuss such things.
Calling them an activist group is an objective statement i believe, and shouldn't be offensive? If i'm wrong please do correct me.

EDIT: NNT's version looks fine.

Of course even with nothing more than a wiki link, you'll still have people causing a shitstorm because you're even recognizing the group, so again in the end you're accomplishing a lot of nothing.

Just as we tag yes-no_pillow, we should also tag BLM shirts.
Honestly i don't understand your point, the movement exists, so denying it's existance is dumb and would make us look dumb.

Mysterious_Uploader said:

Honestly i don't understand your point, the movement exists, so denying it's existance is dumb and would make us look dumb.

There were a number of complaints about Danbooru hosting pro-BLM images at all (all of 2 - the other 3 in the tag are mocking it). If we pulled them, though, that would make another set of users angry about censorship. There's no way to satisfy everyone beyond just waiting for the controversy to die down.

feline_lump said:

There were a number of complaints about Danbooru hosting pro-BLM images at all (all of 2 - the other 3 in the tag are mocking it). If we pulled them, though, that would make another set of users angry about censorship. There's no way to satisfy everyone beyond just waiting for the controversy to die down.

Danbooru is hosting said images on pure artistic merit. Simple as that.
This discussion is dumb. Danbooru is already hosting tons of controversial content for artistic merit. This isn't even about taking a stance, it's about the wiki.
The wiki should be neutral and objective.

+1 to everything in NWF Renim's earlier post

skylightcrystal said:

+1 to everything in NWF Renim's earlier post

Same.

I think the current wiki gives a good, not polarized description and still direct to the point.

DreamFromTheLayer said:

No one seems to mind additional description in other wikis, including you, so I don't see why it should suddenly apply here.

Everything in the readily visible portion of those character wikis is related to tagging and/or translations though. I've seen many if not most of those appear in some form or fashion alongside the characters, and they have been very useful to me at least. It's true however that the character bios are not necessarily immediately applicable to anything, however those were added in purely because not everyone can read Japanese, but they are placed in a hidden section so as to not clutter up the rest of the wiki.

It's however not surprising to to me that one of those who made one of those edits is the one who is not only complaining, but is attacking the work I do on this site personally. To be honest I'm pretty enraged at that right now, especially since this topic was made in good faith, so I'm going to leave it at that.

I saw the last edit NWF Renim did though, and I'm willing to compromise on that. +1

The Flint (girls und panzer) wiki is in my opinion a good example of a well done character wiki. It provides a small bit of info on the character, potentially important trivia, and lays out information useful for tagging.

It's more information than you'd likely have for an organization or movement, but that should be a given as these could typically lack tags for characteristics. Though I find that a small amount of info for the group or organization is useful, particularly because the context of what the organization or movement does obviously can have implications on what is being depicted in images that reference it.